woelkchen
If we nees to support a corporation with our money, it is in SUSE that we must place our hope.
SUSE fired almost all upstream contributors a decade or so ago. They used to employ 10-20 KDE developers, about the same number of GNOME developers, a bunch of OpenOffice developers (their Go-OO variant of OpenOffice served as base for LibreOffice), and maintained Mono. As much as I personally like openSUSE TW (IMO it's the best rolling release distribution), SUSE as a corporate entity is worse than Red Hat under IBM. If you think Red Hat under IBM is bad, look up what SUSE having been a Novell subsidiary and then getting sold two additional times did to them. Red Hat would need cancel upstream contributions for so much more to come down to the level of SUSE. A company looking for enterprise Linux support is still best served with Red Hat. Pretty much the entire competition was freeloading off Red Hat's work. After shutting down their entire desktop department, SUSE was left with a few packagers and two or so people who developed GNOME extensions.
As I wrote in another comment: The company most interested in helping out upstream projects with desktop focus is Valve, not only via their own developers but also by contracting Collabora and Blue Systems. Given how Valve's update cycle of SteamOS is, those contributions will mostly still land first in "regular" Linux distributions such as openSUSE TW or Fedora, though. It's a lucky coincidence that Valve developed and released Steam Deck but they are also mostly just interested in the plumbing and Plasma Desktop itself, not applications (unless it's about apps SteamOS developers use and they need to scratch their own itches though bug fixes). So Bluetooth an power management: sure. Music players: no.
All these corporations looking to kill off their own relevance. They all in the same death cult or something?
IBM uses mostly Windows in house, so they are not interested in desktop Linux and apparently then nobody else would be either.
Yes, it will but so slowly and further down the road, nobody at IBM will see the connection. When Fedora (or desktop Linux in general) will be slightly less appealing to people who in 10 years will become the decision makers at IT departments, it'll weaken the position of Linux and in turn the commercial support providers.
Guess, everyone who does not yet own a Steam Deck needs to get one because Valve seems to be the biggest commercial proponent of consumer GNU/Linux.
pop_OS is a de-crapified Ubuntu remix. It's not a stand-alone distribution. For most packages pop_OS is reliant on Canonical, including graphics drivers. So if you want to use it for gaming and have and AMD or Intel GPU and not an NVidia one, you'll have to stick to Ubuntu's outdated Mesa and kernel drivers. For gaming on AMD/Intel GPUs, something along the lines of EndeavourOS or Fedora should be a better choice. If you use a GeForce, pop_OS should be OK.
XFS is rock solid and still has active development going on, so why not.
Darrick nominated Chandan Babu of Oracle to handle release management for XFS
Oracle? 🤨 Oh boy...
This is at least suspicious
Why is it suspicious that in summer break more people take their Decks to play outside?
Whatever Red Hat is doing with Enterprise Linux has luckily no direct effect on Fedora which in itself is a great distribution, so this is a good step.
Just tried clicking that link, and got a huge pop up refusing me access to the site, and accusing me from being from a site called Hacker News (???).
According to the text in the screenshot you've posted, there is no referrer header, so perhaps you're using some privacy extension that strips referrers.
"contributor license agreement" is such a broad term, a CLA is not bad in all cases. There are plenty of CLAs that are not about one-way proprietarization of software. Examples of OK CLAs are "You agree that you actually have the right to contribute code" or "If you don't specifically attach add a license header, the MIT license is being used".
Obviously companies like Canonical use the term CLA to make their practices look less shady that it actually is.
Fun fact: For a few years HP was very invested in Debian because they saw that as the most likely successor to their old HP-UX Unix on mainframe servers.